Fix func_handle for rule of two #3169
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
henryiii
reviewed
Aug 3, 2021
rwgk
approved these changes
Aug 3, 2021
|
Okay, will backport. |
henryiii
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 3, 2021
* Fix func_handle for rule of two * Apply reviewer suggestion
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
If the copy constructor is defined, the copy assignment constructor should also be defined. Found in #3070 but that was never merged. Found in LGTM static analysis. https://lgtm.com/projects/g/pybind/pybind11/ I looked into turning the clang-tidy check for this, but the only clang-tidy check is way too noisy and will give way too many false positive (only rule of 5 is implemented, ie all constructors, dtor, and assignment operators have to be explicitly defined or defaulted which seem excessive).
The effect is that if we do anything more complex with this struct later, the code will be more maintainable.
Suggested changelog entry: